Trackbacks

• Trackbacks are closed for this post.

Comments

• 8/20/2010 9:53 AM Anonymous wrote:
  8/23/2010  CORRECTION:  CHANGED TO #EO 10-16.  HERE IS THE CORRECTED LANGUAGE:
  AMENDMENT: § 2.00  Authoritv/Action: Executive Order No. 10-15 of August 13, 2010
  is hereby amended to delete the word federally and to insert § 2.07 as follows:
  
  HAVE YOU ALL HEARD THIS? IT'S TRUE. WE ARE GOING BROKE.
  EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10-15
  AN IMMEDIATE SPENDING AND HIRING FREEZE FOR ALL EXECUTIVE BRANCH, TRIBALLY AND FEDERALLY FUNDED EMPLOYEES
  
  2.00 AUTHORITY/ACTION:
  2.01 I hereby authorize this Executive Order to be implemented by all Executive Branch departments of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.
  2.02 No department shall grant a salary or wage increase to any tribally or federally funded staff positions.
  2.03 No department shall establish new tribally or federally funded staff positions or fill vacant existing tribally or federally funded staff positions.
  2.04 A tribally or federally funded employee shall not be transferred from any position to another position during the hiring freeze unless the transfer is critical to health,
  safety or tribal revenue generation activities.
  2.05 Tribally or federally funded employees, managers or directors shall not enter into any contracts, agreements or purchase orders for the acquisition of any items or equipment of which cost exceeds one thousand dollars. Exceptions to this section may be granted by the Principal Chief or Controller for critically necessary work of a department or an event that requires government action to protect life or public safety.
  2.06 Tribally and federally funded employees shall not make expenditures for the cost or reimbursement of out-of-state travel or training. Exceptions to this section may be granted by the Principal Chief or Controller for critically necessary work of an employee or an event that requires government action to protect life or public safety.
  3.00 EFFECTIVE DATE:
  3.01 This Executive Order shall become effective on August 13, 2010 and shall remain in effect for the remainder of FY 2010.
  
  (VOC says:  Sorry if this amended copy isn't typed completely correct, as requested.  I have run out of time.)
  Reply to this
  1. 8/20/2010 5:47 PM Anonymous wrote:
     yeah so that they can fund the 2011 budget with what is left over. when you have a million dollar payment for a casino each month and most programs are FUNDED by gaming, when people are not playing, we are not paying.
     Reply to this
     1. 8/22/2010 1:06 PM Haco wrote:
        Present Council members approved Trade & Commerce members and the CEO Wisner. Todays Tulsa World reveals more legal trouble for the REMY family who Wisner (Bill Fife's recommendation) as CEO for Trade & Commerce funneled Creek money to and made unapproved investments with and in return did not protect the Creek Nation with any evidence of security whatsoever.
        2011 budget would be no problem if the National Council would stop special appropriations and quit involving them selves in the business of the Creek Nation.
        The Tulsa Casino would be paid for if the Council had not continued to meddle. We would have a tobacco compact if the National Council had not been involving themselves personally. AND SO ON.
        Reply to this
     2. 8/24/2010 8:54 PM Red wrote:
        There would be NO payments on the Tulsa Casino if it had been built 5 years ago. The Cherokees paid for their Casino while the economy was hot we had Fife, Alexander, Barnett, Tiger and those who voted with them delaying the Tulsa Casino, while they tried to work deals for theselves, until the interest costs were astronomical and they have spent all the extra money on their pet projects and relatives.
        They also were responsible for NO TOBACCO COMPACT and now the Creek Nation is the laughing stock of Oklahoma Indian Country in addition to loosing all the lawsuits they have ever filed against the Chief and Oklahoma.
        Now Bill Fife single handedly wants to dismantle our government, since he wasn't able to accomplish all the bad government while he was 1 term Chief. He must really be a miserable, self centered person when he thinks he is the only person who knows how the Creek Nation should be run. He has never been successful in running anything - Creek Nation, Bacone and now Tholthlocco, who will rue the day they let him con them into hiring him as a business manager, he was above his level of competence when he delivered mail for Uncle Sam.
        Reply to this
  2. 8/21/2010 12:53 PM Anonymous wrote:
     What I don't understand (and our elite management doesn't seem to grasp) is that monies from the FEDERALLY funded programs cannot be used for anything other than the FEDERAL programs that granted the money (i.e. you can't use federal funds to pay for any TRIBAL shortfall, no way, no how, not ever). Also, federal funds, if not expended, must be returned to the granting federal agency at the end of the fiscal year (or contract). When you give back money it implies that you didn't need it in the first place or that you couldn't meet the deliverables you promised in your grant application. In either case, you severely limit future grant funding opportunities because the granting bodies look at you in either one of two ways: 1)you obviously can't or won't manage your budget in a reasonable fashion or 2)you have incompetent grant managers that can't manage their projects and can't deliver the agreed-upon deliverables. Makes us look exceptionally bad (like we need any additional help in that arena). I don't see how limiting FEDERAL spending through the next 6 weeks (until the end of this fiscal year) is going to shore up all of FY2011's budget. I wish this tribe would employ someone in a position of authority that actually has some fiscal knowledge and experience.
     
     P.S. - here's a one way to save some money: stop buying up every crappy piece of property that someone offers you at three times the going market rate and actually put some of the property we currently own into TRUST so we can stop paying exorbitant taxes.
     Reply to this
     1. 8/22/2010 8:30 PM Anonymous wrote:
        Ok VOC be the man/woman that you are and agree that not all of the money is approved and given by the coumcil. the legislation starts somewhere. So, if you want to inform us, then start where the legislation bill comes from, there it list who introduced the bill and who sponsored it to bring it to the council. The important thing is, who is the writer of the bill to give money. Quit hidding behind the fact that council is fault of all the problems, get your head out of your ass and look around. Band me from here on out....but when its all said and done, I told you
        
        
        (VOC:  We may be corrected if we are in error, however, according to the Constitution, all appropriations come out of the NC, sponsored and voted on by the NC.)
        Reply to this
        1. 8/23/2010 12:27 PM Anonymous wrote:
           You are apparently upset that the council is being blamed for excessive spending. It is their fault; they approve all funding. I get the feeling from you that you think that the council is being forced to spend money that they don’t want to spend and getting all the blame for our shortfalls. Are you saying that someone (whoever you think it is that makes them) is responsible and not the council? I am not aware of anyone who can make the council do anything they don’t want to do. Maybe you do. Would you mind publishing the names of these powerful people? I want to be their campaign manager.
           
           Please, no one wants to band you, not even ban you, or bran you, or pecan you, or Peter Pan you, or anything else.
           Reply to this
           1. 8/23/2010 7:43 PM Anonymous wrote:
              its the chief of the Nation.
              Reply to this
              1. 8/23/2010 10:37 PM anon wrote:
                 You've got the wrong person as being responsible for the money being spent all the way to the poor house. It's the Council, and I will say it again and again because that is the truth!!!!
                 Reply to this
              2. 8/24/2010 9:20 PM wow wrote:
                 The chief? Really? Then why does he choose to veto many of these requests (with objections outlined). Every bill is sponsored by a...wait for it...National Council idiot, er, member. And they (in their own minds) have proven that they will NOT be told what to do by the chief! Take better notes friend, you obviously have not been paying attention.
                 Reply to this

Leave a comment